Tobacco and alcohol are drugs

I created this page because
I am really fed up to daily see peoples destroyed by tobacco. Not grossly
physically destroyed as with heroïn, alcohol or cocaïn, but
subtly destroyed in their mind by this perfect «Big Brother»
poison: still able to lead a «normal» life, such as pursuing
egocentric strategies, hearing at rap «music» or building
nuclear plants, but just the little spark of understanding of life, poetry
and happiness is missing! And I am especially angry when it is persons
to whom I consecrated much efforts and sacrifices, who are perverted by
«youngsters» or «buddies»!

SHALL WE FORBID TOBACCO AND ALCOHOL
Like the other drugs?

The westerner democratic societies all forbad drugs,
for the reason that the freedom to use drugs can only lead us to suffering.
However alcohol and tobacco are exceptions to this forbidding, as
they are an old custom in these countries. But they arise the same
problems as the other drugs:

This tolerance to dangerous practices make difficult to
protect ourselves, and especially to protect children. This is
paradoxical, when there is a heavy repressive arsenal against la marijuana,
however no more dangerous than tobacco. For this reason I created
this page, to make available all the arguments and considerations
against tobacco and alcohol, in a co-ordinated manner.

When we speak about forbidding tobacco and alcohol, then
some do not miss to shout «fascist» and «intolerant».
In reality in this case it is the forbidding which is a warrant of
our freedom: without smoke nor alcohol, we are free to think and to
live cleanly, and especially we are far more easy to tolerate... for
the others! Before shouting that their freedom is threatened, the
supporters of tobacco and alcohol should show clever and responsible
enough to first behave in a way respectful of the freedom of the others!
Especially while not attempting to make new adepts (especially among
youngsters) and while not imposing to the others the consequences
of their conduct: passive smoking, violence, accidents, bad family
ambience!

Otherwise, so bad, but there would remain no other solution
than the TOTAL FORBIDDING, applying to tobacco and alcohol the laws
already in use for the other drugs. Before going so radical, emergency
and immediately efficient steps should be:

Forbidding to youngsters;

Forbidding advertising;

Recognizing an offence of inciting (in school, family,
work...);

Enough taxation to
cover the totality of health and accident expenses consequences
of their use;

Making an offence of
accidents and losses of all kinds committed under the influence
of tobacco and alcohol;

Making an offence of
passive smoking (including in family).

Some may think, about forbidding, to the negative precedent
of the prohibition in the United States, which favoured gangsters
more than a sane living. In reality the failure comes from the fact
that this prohibition was founded on unhealthy puritanist motives,
and experienced like a restriction, and not as a protection of our
freedom. Anyway any efficient political step always fired up a fascist
or populist reaction, thus requiring enough intelligence and political
will not to be trapped into these miserable arguments.

Some hypocritically proposed to legalize drugs,
to limit consumption! In reality what is forbidden is always less
practised than what is authorized. In forbidding all without discrimination
at least the attitude of the society would be coherent and really
motivating.

The drug users point at some so-called «moralists»
defend the forbidding with in fact hypocritical motives, such
as fighting a way of life different of their. But these antisocial
motives do not deprive of any value the arguments against drugs. On
the contrary, as I myself observed into several «alternative»
movements, drug created here as much havoc as into the «normal»
society, and it was among the main causes of the failure of the Hippy
movement. So anybody who claims to defend any «advanced»
social view has much more reasons to refuse drugs, including tobacco
and alcohol.

Some users of tobacco, alcohol or other drugs, think that
the forbidding has a putitanist motive, such as condemning
pleasure. I think that this argument is very relevant, and if this
unhealthy puritanian motive was the only one for condemning drugs,
so we would have to defend the freedom of using drugs. But unfortunatelly
using drugs gives an immediate pleasure only at the cost of much more
suffering and havoc in the future. So we can validly renounce to drugs,
in the name of the search for happiness and a really long lasting
pleasure. Il this struggle for life, we can condemn drugs without
any need to make any association with these puritans. Anti-pleasure
puritanism and anti-consciousness drugs are just two evils which seem
to fight each other but which in reality collaborate.

Peoples living in Muslim countries where alcohol is
forbidden, should see there a chance, rather than an obstacle,
as it is really the forbidding of alcohol which guaranties us the
freedom to live with all our human faculties, without this pan attached
at our tail. The aspiration of peoples for freedom is right, but when
the first freedoms obtained are smoking and drinking, then they only
exchanged an enslavement against another. And those who think that
westerner countries are paradises where everything is permitted, should
try to come here with their tanned face and unemployment card, just
to see how things really go on.

PSYCHOLOGICAL EFFECTS OF TOBACCO

The physical effects of tobacco are well known:
lung and throat cancers, breath troubles, unfavourable action on many
diseases. These effects are serious enough to call for forbidding.
But these physical effects must not hide the psychological effects,
as much serious or more, and as serious as that of other drugs.

To say that tobacco has large psychological effects
may surprise some. The problem is that WE DO NOT PERCEIVE THESE
EFFECTS, as we are IN A SOCIETY OF TOBACCO USERS: all the psychological
or intellectual standards were established by tobacco smokers, or
on their example. But if we were in a society with marijuana as the
common standard, in turn its effects would go unnoticed and the effects
of tobacco very obvious. Simple matter of perspective.

But for anybody not already conditioned, the effects
of tobacco are really obvious.

For instance, IQ tests indicate the capacity to logical
reasoning, but not of other forms of intelligence, intuitive,
non-conceptual, sensitive. It is precisely these forms of intelligence
which would be attacked by the alkaloids of tobacco. With its exciting
action, it favourizes the dualistic intelligence, the domain of activity,
of self-defence, of action and its means, and inhibits the non-dual
intelligence, intuitive, the domain of sensitivity, of contemplation,
of meanings and of purposes. This is very visible in the case of the
defenders of nuclear power, very at ease in complex engineer calculations,
but unable of simply considering the simple reasonings and human friendly
motives of the opponents.

Neurology tells us that the various brain circuits
are activated or inhibited by neuromediators (chemical substances
assuming a messenger role), thus activating or closing the corresponding
consciousness faculties: relfection, emotions, calculation, sensitivity....But
at every moment we keep the freedom to use any other consciousness
faculty, and immediatelly neuromediators activate the required brain
areas. Drugs act in usurping the activity of the neuromediators, activating
certain peculiar brain areas, and thus systematically blocking others.
WE LOSE THE FREEDOM TO CHOOSE WHICH CONSCIOUSNESS FACULTY WE USE,
ONLY A PREDEFINED CONSCIOUSNESS REMAINS. And we do not realize this,
exactly as when driving a car we do not see an obstacle hidden in
the dead angle of vision.

More accurately tobacco would reduce affective capacities,
sympathetic or subtle, favouring the strategical, dualistic or conflicting
aspects. The tobacco user only has an intellectual experience of
affection, of subtle emotions, of aesthetics, when he does not simply
completely miss them. Also he has only an intellectual understanding,
or simply no understanding, about the great choices of life, such
as being altruistic or egocentric. I remember that, in the social
meetings I attended in the 1970', that the thicker the smoke fog was,
the more abstracted and far away of happiness the debates were. These
smoke-enslaved leftists were only able to turn a merry altruistic
ideal into an intellectual strategy problem.

But the most common trouble I noticed among tobacco users
may be the loss of free-will: even knowing that his behaviour
arises concerns, even if he can do something about this, the tobacco
user has troubles to change his problematic behaviours (all his behaviours,
not only tobacco). Even if we see him take decisions and commitments,
he cannot follow them, he even forgets them, in a matter of months,
and even of hours. I think that this oblivion of our very own consciousness
realizations is the most recognizable symptom of tobacco use. And
certainly the most frightening.

These problems certainly have serious consequences on
the personal happiness of the tobacco user, who perceives life
through a haze which hides him all subtlety, all poetry, al significance
of life. But there is also a social hazard, when thinkers,
scientists, politicians, teachers, corporate leaders, trade union
leaders, and even psychologists and sociologists, all perceive
life through this screening fog. So how could we be astonished
if the decisions of all these peoples so often miss of elementary
human sensitivity!

We could assess that all the great reductive ideologies,
capitalism, rationalism, scientism, materialism, fundamentalism and
pharisaïsm, are only possible with the narrow-mindedness of tobacco.
As a matter of fact, all the dictators favoured the use of tobacco.
For instance the Chinese fascism introduced it in all the colonies
of this country, together with alcohol, prostitution and gambling.

At last all the tantric masters state that tobacco
forbids the great yogas only able to actuate our full human potential.
To obtain such a dreadful result, there must really be a profound
alteration of consciousness.

PSYCHOLOGICAL EFFECTS OF ALCOHOL

The physical effects of alcohol are well known:
cirrhosis, heart diseases, coarse and redish face, unfavourable action
on many diseases, bad smell.

But these bad physical effects of alcohol must not hide
the psychological effects, as much serious or more, and as serious
as that of other drugs.

While favouring coarse feelings, physical, strong and meaty
tastes, alcohol unfavourises the world of the feelings, sensitivity,
whithout speaking of the subtle poetry or transcendances, which become
unreachable.

The psychological effects of alcohol at the time of a crisis
are well known (unbalancing of emotions, confused mind, motion troubles,
ridiculous behaviour). But the psychological effects of the dayly
intoxication with «small» doses are also known, at
least better than that of tobacco: materialism, triviality, bad temper,
aggravation of conflits, loss of will, loss of the responsabily sense...

On the countrary of tobacco, these effects are known enough
to be considered as an offence in divorce cases, or when driving vehicules
or machines. As a matter of fact, at time of drinking the individual
is aware of the possible consequences, and thus responsible.

Alcohol at low dose in rare or unique occasions, however
has a psychedelical effect which made it advocated in many religious
ceremonials (from the Dyonisos cult to the catholique mass) and in
some tantrical initiations, for purposes of uninhibiting feelings
or sensuality. However, one must keep to a really very occasional
consumption: only some doses are enough to destroy this psycheledical
effect, which is anyway not waranted, nor clean, and never indispensible.
This initiatic effect thus forcibly implies an... initiatic use!

psychedelic drugs of the type of marijuana: alcohol at
small unique dose, peyotl, psilocybin, LSD, ecstasy...

Drugs of the first two kinds, whatever they are «soft»
(without destroying effects visible in the short run) or «hard», are
all to abandon, as they have no real interest. Only tea can be accepted,
as its moderated effect favourises concentration without occulting
anything else.

Marijuana and psychedelic drugs

The case of drugs of the type of marijuana is more complex.
It is quite obvious that some must be forbidden, as very dangerous
(LSD, ecstasy). Peyotl and psilocybin would not have known secondary
effects... because there are no studies on these rare substances!

A strong tendency in the 1960-70
was to ask for the freedom to use marijuana, and even LSD,
for their supposed potential of positive transformation of the human
mind. Alas experience yelded quite few positive results: the transformation
of our minds can only result of a long run psychological work A little
psychedelic kick can be helpful, but is not really indispensible.
Anyway, without perseverance into concentration and dayly spiritual
work, it will lead nowhere, it will be only a glimpse without consequences,
a visiting card received from paradise, but without the address of
the sender. This can even produce a «spiritual dependency»: to prefer
an illusory realization in smoking than a real profound work. There
can even very easily be a psychological dependency, and I met peoples
who were really unable to be happy without their joint, and even peoples
who became unable of the most basic social behaviour. At Katmandu,
at the great epoch of the hippies, it is said that the king has asked
to his Lamas to test marijuana, in order to understand why all these
westerner youngsters went to Nepal to consume it. «We obtain
the same effects with meditations for beginners» they told.
Perhaps the king laughed, but since marijuana is forbidden in Nepal.

Worse, recent studies seem to show harmful effects of marijuana
in the long run, which make its regular consumption not advisable.
What I whitnessed incites me to think that these nasty effects may
appear with only some joints. After, with a mechanism similar to that
of tobacco, the marijuana smokers would lose the freedom to choose
which consciousness faculty they will use.

Anyway smoking marijuana arises the same cancer hazard
and respiratory diseases than tobacco, as there are the same cancer
agents in hemp smoke than in tobacco smoke. And even much more, as
there are no filters to joints! (Confirmed by Pr John Henry of the
Imperial College School of Medicine of London, who states about ten
of thousands killed by cannabis smoking.)

But the more idiot is certainly to associate marijuana
with... tobacco! As the effect of these two drugs is opposite,
they cancel their «advantages», but without forgetting to additionnate
their nasty effects!

More recently, the hip-hop-punk movements ask for
the legalisation of marijuana and even of more dangerous drugs. The
problem is that these hip-hop-punk movements do not look at any expansion
of consciousness, but on the countrary its degradation. Anyway no
lesson was retained of the hopeless failures in the 1960'! About French
presidential elections in 2002, most of the candidates clainming
to be «progressists» (left, extreme-left or «greens»)
asked for more freedom to smoke marijuana. So we can absolutelly not
be astonished of the result of these elections, and even not to regret
it. It is clear that these peoples are intellectuals who never had
to assume a friend or children dependent of hemp smoking. These revendication
are, at best, demagogic, giving a very bad image of freedom and democraty,
populist, laxist and relativist, which would have loss any notion
of protection of the citizens. As for myself, I did not voted anti-democraty
in the second turn (which opposed the right wing to populist extreme-right),
but I also had not voted for marijuana supporters in the first.. Ah
if these peoples had read the part on logic of my book «General
Epistemology», they could have understood why revendication
seen as «progressist» thirty years
ago are today perfectly reactionnary!

The above peoples also state that to legalise marijuana
would control the proliferation of traffickers and limit health
hazards. This is perfectly false: legalizing alcohol and tobacco never
eliminated the health problems they created, and to eliminate traffickers
in this way, we would have to legalise all the drugs!

So the supposed advantages of marijuana do not balance
the real hazards of a regular or wild consumption, out of any
spiritual guidance. For this reason, my opinion is to legalise
nothing. At best we can tolerate some traditionnal or spiritual
uses: -Peyotl in a chamanic context -Alcohol at small unique dose,
or symbolic dose, in the mass or some tantric practices. -Marijuana,
in some tantric practices of Hinduism. But the danger of a legalisation
in these cases is to see these authorisations diverted by sects (nasty
or fake spiritual groups) or transformed in pretexts for a non-spiritual
consumption. For this reason I propose only tolerances, which would
have to be established (or cancelled) by organisms in charge of monitoring
sects or authorizing religious congregations.

Using drugs for medical purposes is regulated by
procedures for authorizing medecines. There is nothing to say, except
that some prejudices may have, or still can, produce delays
very harmful for ill persons. For instance, morphin was forbidden
for a long time, when it is the only real cure against strong pains
(and without danger, at medicinal dose). Another example, an homeopathic
medicine based on cannabis was forbidden in France... even if was
required to consume thousand tons at a time to have a noticeable psychological
effect!

The industrial use of hemp by-products, advocated
by some ecologists, still suffer from interdiction or suspicion on
the real purpose of this cultivation. To stop this, its promoters
would select varieties without cannabinol, as it was done with colza
without erucic acid.

In a more general way, addiction can happen with many
other things than with noxious substances, it can happen with
TV, games, money... A basic trend of the human mind is to go toward
what produces pleasure, so we can be addicted with anything pleasant.
And we can forbid noxious substances or activities, but not pleasure!
The general solution here does not come from law, but from individual
psychological/spiritual work and understanding. Often going toward
the immediate satisfaction brings more pain in the future, for instance
when we indulge in having a sexual intercourse with an unknown person,
despites the hazard of serious diseases. So seeking only the immediate
pleasure is awkward. The skillfull approach is still to seek for pleasure,
yes, but with a much larger view, where one builds a real long run
happiness from gathering its real causes and mastering desires and
emotions. This is more difficult, but at least we do not need to ask
to legalize this!

TOBACCO SELLER OR TOBACCO TRAFFICKER?

Considering the seriousness of the effects of tobacco,
many peoples already wonder if it is really honnest to sell it. Are
all our small retailers scruppleless dealers? Certainly not, but about
great international compagnies, reality could pass over our wildest
expectations. So we learn (French Yahoo actualités, november
1, 2002) that the European Union sued several great tobacco compagnies
(Reynolds, Phillip Morris, Japan Tobacco) about an incredible smuggling
network, concerning tobacco, drug, weapons, even involving saddam
hussein and a terrorist organisation!!
Several procecutions are going on in the USA. Large scale mind control
are also used, especially with the well organized falsification of
science results on effects of tobacco. Let us point at Ragnar Rylander,
a swedish «independant» hygiena teacher in the University
of Geneva, who published «studies» claiming the innocuity of
passive smoking. In fact he was funded since thirty years by the cigarette
maker Phillip Morris, and numerous other cases are under investigation.
(French review Sciences et Avenir, n°2667, May 2001, Page 38)

If such informations are true, so there is no difference
between tobacco traffickers and the other drug traffickers, nor in
their methods, neither in their nasty effects on health and society.

Patches and e-cidarette do not protect us

We see more and more methods for stopping smoking, based on nicotine
patches, or more recently, the e-cigarette.

These methods are scams, as they only allow to take the nicotine by another
route, rather than releasing its grip. So they are certainly not a
tobacco «withdrawal» or a release of the drug. (quid and
hookah are also in this category). They can be even more dangerous,
because high dose of nicotine can too create a state of stupefaction,
like the other drugs. Their only advantage is to avoid the cancer
risks associated with the smoke. The patches also avoid passive
smoking, but I am not sure that this is the case for the e-cigarette.
The other psychological effects of the drug remain in any ways, as
well as the bad example of the public use of drug.

So drug traffickers adapt to the fashion, in order to maintain
their so profitable slavery.

LOST TRADES AND TRADITIONS

Forbidding tobacco and alcohol will certainly foster
the loss of «very popular» «cultural traditions».
I think that it is not really a pitty: there are many other ways of
relaxing, chatting, meeting, than around a drink or choking in smoke.
And ways really affordable for everybody, not only for «adults»
or «among men»!

The disappearance of trades linked to tobacco (planter)
or alcohol (wine grower, oeno«logist», dealer...) can be considered
by some as a serious problem. However, it would not be the first time
in mankind history that technical of custom improvements make disappear
whole parts of society! But a strong forbidding would really bring
great sufferings to the producers. For this reason a social approach
seems better: to allow for a reconversion for all these peoples, or
to start other activities. Especially wine grovers could easily produce
grapefruit juice, which misses today. In the case of cocaïn or
opium, it is now well recognized that the key is also in the reconversion
of farmers, not in gasing the last wilderness regions.

MIND CONTROL METHODS OFTEN USED TO JUSTIFY
TOBACCO AND ALCOHOL

In France, tobacco retailers also sell newspapers... and sweeties,
to acustom children to come into their shops. When teenage comes,
the cigarettes naturally takes the place of the sweets...

Recently in France (2000) numerous papers described a discovery
as what red wine would protect against heart diseases... but most
of them just «forget» to precise that the responsible
of this protection is the COLOURING of the red wine (polyphenols),
which is already present in red grapefruit and in numerous other
berries! If these «scientists» had found that red
fruits protect against heart diseases, did these papers had speak
about it?

Drinking or smoking would be a matter of personnal choice, in
which nobody would be allowed to judge or to interfere. False:
as for any ethical question, it is our concern to us all, from
compassion, or simply from having to bear the consequences on
everybody.

Drinking or smoking would be a matter of a «fair»
quantity: a little is meaned not to harm. Even if this would be
true, the simple fact of taking a small «innoffensive»
quantity is already a breach in our commitment, and always a very
effective incitation for us or others to take more. This pretext
is also used for harassing or hazing, which are meaned not to
harm, even if they go so far as rape.

A common mind control method is that tobacco and alcohol users
ask for their «freedom», or say that this freedom is threatened.
It is like a prisonner who ask for the freedom to stay in jail!

Facing their victims of secondhand smoking, tobacco addicts say
they are «attacked»: the culprits say they are the victims, stating
that their freedom is «threatened». This is typically narcissic
pervert's reasonning.

The most common manipulation is anyway the idea as what it would
be «virile» to smoke and drink. This is common in uncultivated
or populist groups, but also among «switched» youngsters
where to consume drugs is good, and the forbidding an old timed
«taboo».

A manipulation also common is that, if we do not drink and smoke,
so we should not have any sexual life. I simply not see the relationship
between the two. Right on the countrary, if we like life, so we
look for pleasures like love, and we flee sources of suffering
such as tobacco and alcohol. Anyway the fact of not drinking and
smoking never restrained me in my sexual life. Perhaps because
I no not eat meat too...

IF WE ARE HOOKED...

If we are hooked to tobacco or alcohol, or to any other
drug, we must consider very seriously this situation, and prepare
ourselves to a sustained effort. Some peoples success, so it is possible.
But there is alas no miracle remedy, and whoever was one day addicted
to any kind of dependency is for the remainder of his life weakened
toward relapses. So a constant vigilance is the only possible way.

At first we must clearly identify our friends and
foes. Our friends will encourage us, approve us, they will pay
the effort not to create situations with temptations. Our foes will
«gently» mock at our efforts and failures, they will
«innocently» continue to light cigarettes and open bottles
in our presence, exactly as if our decision never took place. We
shall recognize our friends as they will hurt us, and our foes as
they will be all gentle flattering. Be logical, follow our friends
and flee our foes.

There exist several medicinal methods to stop
dependency (see a specialist physician, or a social centre). However
they are only an HELP for our will. Only OURSELVES HAVE THE POWER
TO HEAL.

The only thing which can build a real motivation to
stop a dependency is TO REALLY FEEL THAT IT IS A LIMITATION IN
OUR HAPPINESS. So long as we consider tobacco and alcohol as
«a pleasure» about whitch it is «a pitty» to renounce, so
long as we do not understand that it exists really better things
elsewhere, so this carnal desire will always be stronger that any
intellectual motivation. The remedy is TO REALLY FEEL A SENSUAL
ATTRACTION TOWARDS WHAT ALCOHOL OR TOBACCO DEPRIVES US: Love, life
with others, beauty, poetry, spirituality. At that time drug really
appears as an obstacle, and arises a real desire to get rid of it.

In the same line, a simpler work is about VIBRATIONS:
get interested in nature, sun, flowers, nice colours and sweet perfumes...
The backgroud of this page is a (very simplified) example of possible
VISUALISATION: The grey and the dirty are cleansed and let free
the nice and the joyous. (To see it again click on «actuate»
in your browser)

For the same reason, I strongly advise to undertake
a profound SPIRITUAL WORK.

For interested peoples, to take vows, for instance
religious, can be a supplementary protection. But in case of relapse,
harder is the fall!

Spiritual purification techniques, especially
very physical practices such as fast with prayer and visualisation
of WHITE LIGHT, seems well fitted. From experience, I advise to
do these visualisations with strong feelings of being soothed, to
feel clean, light weight, de-smoked out, purified... as it is these
feelings which will be efficient on our mind.

Some alcoholic drinks has a pleasant taste...
Yes, but not really more than fruit juices! So where is the interest
to put our health at risk? One can note that yoga practices generate
feelings which are sometimes compared to that of alcohol. But clean,
free, without hazard... and far better!

Our worse ennemy is our own mind, as from where come
all the SELF-JUSTIFICATIONS such as «why to deprive me of this pleasure»...

Go and see the movie «
The Lord of the Rings» and think that you are Frodo and that
your smoke, your bottle or your drug, it is sauron's ring, which
has its own will, and which tries relentlessly to enslave your mind,
makes you submit to your ennemies and confuse your friends with
attackers... Frodo is in fact a very ordinary character, it could
be you, he is very vulnerable and fallible; his only merrit is to
do only whats he can do, but to do it completelly.

Think to peoples who RELY ON US, our spouse, our chidren,
our parents, our spiritual masters, who hope to see us happy, who
undertook many efforts for us, who depend on us...

The best attitude toward failures and relapses, is
to CONSIDER THEM AS MISDEEDS, but in a manner NON-DUAL with keeping
our SELF-ESTIME. Really the two extremes of thoughlessness and feeling
guilty are the best means to ruin our will.

Relapses can occur at times where we are weakened: -Nervous
breakdown, illness, physical suffering -Sorrows, bereavement,
love separation -Social destabilization, loss of employment, judiciary
suit, accusation, stalking... -Time of doubt, of questionning
(when we do not know where we are about). As soon as one of these
situations occurs, we must immediatelly take our guard.
Often the effort consecrated only to the tobacco dependency will
heal the whole situation.

Relapses can occur following a social presure:
-going aroud «buddies» (peoples who manipulate us while feigning
a frienship relation, but their real purpose is only to lower our
vibration at their level). -Certains professional occasions, especially
«commercial». -Passive smoking, especially of the spouse.
-Easy access to tobacco or alcohol. All this are real good reasons
to change of life, of frequentations. If it is difficult, a tip
is to have an interior life, hidden, sheltered from any manipulation
or bad influences.

I tell here some folk remedies, that I did
not tested, but the «guinea pigs» told me they were efficient: -Eat
only apples for three days (the guy who told me this story was inadvertantly
locked for three days in a attic, with only apples to eat. He was
disgusted from smoke, after). - Put in mouth and thoroughly chew
three nettle leaves (well stingy, otherwise it does not work). These
«tricks» will perhaps the trigger which will make things go on the
good side.

NOT TO START

The first cigarette, the first glass ARE THE MOST DANGEROUS!
If we accept them, then we are compelled to accept all the others
and we renounce to the freedom to stop! As a matter of fact, it is
far more difficult, painful and uncertain to stop any drug that to
refuse it...

It is far more interesting NEVER TO START. The difficulty
of not starting is NOTHING AT ALL compared to that of stopping!

The peoples at their first cigarettes or first glasses
often have the illusion that they are not hooked. So they go on...
until they discover that they are really hooked!

At a pinch, maybe shall we taste once smoke or wine, story
of «not making of this a taboo»: this experience must vaccine us definitively
against this horror.

We must clearly understant that:

We are in a society
which incites us to smoke and drink (advertising, social standards,
«gentle» mocking from «buddies», ceremonies, certain
trades where «we must» drink...) But we can expect NOTHING
MORE from this society if we comply to this law.

There is nothing honouring,
nor «viril» in drinking and smoking. Those who tell such kind
of stupid speeches has in fact no real values nor references. THEY
CAN BRING NOTHING TO US.

Peoples who incite us, or who want to «initiate» us (see to enforce
us by threatening) to drink and smoke are not «our friends»,
and they are especially not thinkers or gurus. They are, at best,
wasters who were made themselves while refusing to recognize this,
at worse they are perverts who attempt to destroy us. We must
anyway FLEE THEM AS OUR ENNEMIES.

Peoples who smoke in our presence (second hand smoking) are just
ignorants or boors. Try to explain them that it is dangerous for
the others, and they will no longer be ignorants. Unfortunatelly,
most of the time they will remain boors.

People who incite children to drink or smoke are just corrupting
them. I think it is possible and justified to carry complaint in this
case.

To legalize drugs to stop drug delinquency?

Some intellectuals are asking for the legalisation of all the drugs,
including the most dangerous, under the pretext that it would be
the interdiction and the «war against drug»
which would cause the problems. In this sweet vision,
legalisation would magically end dependancy, transmission
of AIDS, road accidents caused by drugs, and violence
caused by trafficking...

I allow myself to stand against this intellectual swindle:
in the name of freedom, we should let ourselves become slaves of
one of the most cruel forms of dependancy in existence,
and remove already insufficient legal protections?

We however have a blatant exemple right under our nose: the
legalisation of alcohol never suppressed the problems, and
alcohol remains one of the great causes of car accidents,
disputes, divorces, mistreatments of children, etc.

This argument remains an argument of sophistics, where the opinion
of a (supposed) majority would become «legitimate»,
independently of any ethical concern or scientific evidences...

To take drug will always remain a masochist self-destruction process,
a refusal to accept the free consciousness and the marvels
it allows us to enjoy. To offer drug, or to encourage it,
will forever remain a fascist and totalitarian aggression.

I do not like war, but I feel in solidarity with the soldiers
who expose their life to fight the fascists trafickers,
whatever they are narcos, FARCs, talibans, etc. This war may
last long, but it will last as long as there will be
people to imagine that drug is something good.

As the only true solution is here: to stop believing that drugs are good.

The war on drugs is only starting

Added in September 2013

In
recent years we hear a lot that the «war on drugs»
(police or military operations aimed at dismantling networks of
traffickers or producers) has «failed». Indeed, despite
the arrest of many traffickers, the consumption of drugs continues,
calling for more and more traffickers who do not hesitate to put
their lives at risk, for the huge gains. The «logical»
conclusion of this «failure» would be to... legalise
drugs! Thus there would be no more need to fight the traffic, which
would become an «economic activity» as any other!

This
reasoning is false and deceiving in several ways.

-It
does not account with the enslavement and the risks the drug users
suffer... and against which they would no longer have any legal way
to protect themselves. In fact, the consumption of legal drugs is by
far the strongest, as well as the associated accidents and diseases.
And when we find our children being drugged legally, we have no
recourse.

-It is
based on a dualistic conception
of the world, where the «West» (the victims of
drug) would «oppress» the poor countries (which often
have no means to defend themselves from the traffickers operating on
their soil).

-It is
clearly the emanation of an «economic lobby», which even
less than any other cares for our freedom or our happiness.

In
reality, the legalization of drugs would lead to even more victims,
and would withdraw still more means to defend oneself, as we see with
tobacco and alcohol. As for the producing countries, they would
sacrifice even more of their fields to unnecessary cultures, at the
expense of their food crops.

We
however have many similar situations: the war against gangsters, rape
or road violence did not eliminated these things. Do we hear about
legalizing them? No. Because we know very well that legalizing these
things would increase them, as we see in countries where rape is not
actually punished.

The
reality is simple: The ones who speak of stopping the war on drugs
are in fact fascist Marxist groups, which lost any ideal of freedom,
but still retain their methods of mind control and propaganda, or
their sectarian hatred of the USA (We actually have on the terrain a
very opportunistic alliance of gangsters who fund allegedly
revolutionary groups in exchange for their protection. And both claim
to defend our freedom, ha ha ha)

In
facts, the only mistake of organizations like the CIA was to spear
the war on drugs only against the producers, thinking they were the
primary cause of the use of drugs. In reality, these traffickers are
just opportunistic parasites. They just take profit of a generation
afflicted by all the cynical and hopeless ideologies issued from the
hip-hop-punk movements and the media, without any denial of our
intellectuals, educators, teachers or politicians. Human beings all
feel the need for sensations and emotions. But when one hates his
body, his mind and his society, then one is forced to search these
feelings elsewhere: drugs, violent games, revolts without purpose,
conspiracy theories, etc.

Thus,
without forgetting the well-deserved tribute to the ones who risk
their lives in the jungles of Colombia or in the mountains of
Afghanistan, we must acknowledge that the main theatre of the war
against drugs is not there. It is here, in the media, in our
neighborhoods, in schools and high schools, where we must expose all
the despairing ideological viruses, and immunize people against them, with ideal and positive
energy or
interesting prospects. To show that we can be happy and enjoy life
without depending on dangerous substances of parasitic trades.

The
problem with organizations like the CIA, is that they very poorly
positioned themselves as donors of ideal, with their «questionable»
methods and ambiguous goals. They really need to change all this, if
they want their actions to appear legitimate in the eyes of
everybody.